we all know most of the people using programs like Decrypter are using them to make copies of movies they rent from their favorite dvd rental place
speak for yourself. i use it so i can watch dvd's on my linux box - without being forced to watch those goddamn fucking piece-of-shit advertisements, toothpick-in-the-eyes-Clockwork-Orange style, unable to skip or fast-forward through them.
if dvd makers treat me like a fucking lab rat, i reserve the right to hop the walls of the maze, if i can.
Then he got laid off, all the incompetent windows admins got laid off, and they hired me. I continued to develop and maintain all the linux stuff and add more open source solutions. The company spent zero for support and software costs (I ran everything on Debian. All software was free as in speech and beer). THey just had to pay the salary of one guy to manage the open source website, database, and do continued development in free languages like php, perl, python, ruby...
i know torvalds doesn't care about the politics, and for him it's all just for fun, but maybe now would be a good time to consider the company he keeps.
OpenLDAP 2.1 is over Two Hundred Times faster than OpenLDAP 2.0 and already significantly faster than Netscape 5. OpenLDAP 2.2 is 30-50% faster than OpenLDAP 2.1 and leaves Netscape in the dust. OpenLDAP 2.3 is faster yet.
and that is completely irrelevant *if you can't get the software installed and configured without slitting your wrists*.
when presenting an HTML table, with a big drop-down in each row, is there some way to send that list to the client only once instead of numOfRows times?
In an interview following his keynote, Smith told eWEEK: "First you have to start with some dialogue. We are now interested in it, and we'd like to do this. I think we'll find we've got a lot more in common than we realize..."
for example, each wants the other to fuck off and die.
I'm talking the large companies with thousands of employees to deal with. In this envirnoment windows 2003 is attractive, even when linux is free, because it is jam packed with things to help in enterprise wide server administration. Let's not kid ourselves, it takes alot to be a good linux/unix system admin, and you guys can wear that badge with pride. Since the market is not exactly flooded with experts like yourselves, companies like it that a less experienced person can still keep a win2k3/XPSP2 network up and running, and can apply rules to machines company wide, using tools like active directory with pretty UI.
sad to say, i agree with you.
F/OSS could make great inroads in the enterprise if it could peel away the management layer from the environment. some places are loathe to use windows on the server side; but they're forced to use windows on the client side, which means they need windows client management software, which invariably runs on windows servers, and often requires active directory.
so you have a far more difficult case to make for F/OSS servers if you already have windows servers running AD and your client management software.
this lack of concern (and sometimes outright contempt) for enterprise features in F/OSS is a big fat gift to microsoft and proprietary software.
Maybe, Just maybe, Microsoft and Linux fans can sit down at the same table and talk about the current computer market scene, but it will take some SERIOUS, serious change in Microsoft's approach (FUD, monopolizing, etc.). It would be a great day, but hopefully Microsoft will at some point open at least some of its software up.
OK, so a corporation should be allowed to try to extinguish our computing freedom by any means available, and if it doesn't work, we should let them make nice with us?
if i were among the crew invited to go, i'd be polite, not say much, listen very closely to what they have to say, agree to nothing, then go home and spend about a week trying to figure out what it was they were up to. then i'd do whatever it took to thwart them.
They probably have the best accountants and economists in the industry, and they made a mistake. The first time in a long time (ever?) they missed their earnings goal. [...] Their stock is flat, their earnings are no longer in double-digit growth, their future OS is thoroughly unimpressive, their Office suite is prohibitively expensive, they have no diversification that can support their profit margins in the long-term, they are the last to endorse OSS for commodity products, their competitors are innovating like mad...
and the crux of their woes is a bunch of code that they cannot buy, written by volunteers that they cannot buy (except that asshole from IronPython), presenting their basement-dungeon captive customers with a way out completely unforseen by their corporate planners. and, on the spit-and-polish side, you have OS X available, which is mostly compatible with F/OSS.
their nasty, brutish house of cards is set to come tumbling down. microsoft is dead - fuck microsoft. can $20,000 per month to ralph reed save their souls? or funnel enough money to the corporatist government to eliminate the communist unamerican cancerous hippy competition, perhaps by invalidating the GPL or carefully crafted patent laws?
this is truly exciting. if it didn't directly threaten our computing freedom it might even be fun to watch.
Slashdot Mirror
speak for yourself. i use it so i can watch dvd's on my linux box - without being forced to watch those goddamn fucking piece-of-shit advertisements, toothpick-in-the-eyes-Clockwork-Orange style, unable to skip or fast-forward through them.
if dvd makers treat me like a fucking lab rat, i reserve the right to hop the walls of the maze, if i can.
please extend my kudos to the boss for hiring the mentally handicapped.
are you hiring?
i know torvalds doesn't care about the politics, and for him it's all just for fun, but maybe now would be a good time to consider the company he keeps.
and that is completely irrelevant *if you can't get the software installed and configured without slitting your wrists*.
it's a sad day indeed when you feel you have to qualify something like that...
...will they pat me down first before i meet him?
jesus h christ, do we have to put smileys after *everything* that's obviously humorous?
that's microsoft's fault for not using an open standard document format.
i'm looking forward to castigating MS regularly now, until they fully support the standard.
ok, i'm with you.
and then you sit there, looking at it impotently. or were you actually thinking you were going to shoot an activist?
what if people crack it at the same time? will they divide the xbox into several thousand equal parts?
luckily cashiering at soft-serve ice cream joints is a portable skill.
typical robber-baron activity: fuck the masses by appropriating the fruits of their labor.
when presenting an HTML table, with a big drop-down in each row, is there some way to send that list to the client only once instead of numOfRows times?
should read "Microsoft Wants Bend-over With OSS Advocates"
for example, each wants the other to fuck off and die.
"In the world of software development today there is a broad panoply of software development models," Smith said.
they misspelled pan-opoly.
sad to say, i agree with you.
F/OSS could make great inroads in the enterprise if it could peel away the management layer from the environment. some places are loathe to use windows on the server side; but they're forced to use windows on the client side, which means they need windows client management software, which invariably runs on windows servers, and often requires active directory.
so you have a far more difficult case to make for F/OSS servers if you already have windows servers running AD and your client management software.
this lack of concern (and sometimes outright contempt) for enterprise features in F/OSS is a big fat gift to microsoft and proprietary software.
pedant slapfight! pedant slapfight!
the primary difference being that the church of scientology hasn't managed to convince the vast majority of the ignorant that the CoS is somehow good.
OK, so a corporation should be allowed to try to extinguish our computing freedom by any means available, and if it doesn't work, we should let them make nice with us?
if i were among the crew invited to go, i'd be polite, not say much, listen very closely to what they have to say, agree to nothing, then go home and spend about a week trying to figure out what it was they were up to. then i'd do whatever it took to thwart them.
and the crux of their woes is a bunch of code that they cannot buy, written by volunteers that they cannot buy (except that asshole from IronPython), presenting their basement-dungeon captive customers with a way out completely unforseen by their corporate planners. and, on the spit-and-polish side, you have OS X available, which is mostly compatible with F/OSS.
their nasty, brutish house of cards is set to come tumbling down. microsoft is dead - fuck microsoft. can $20,000 per month to ralph reed save their souls? or funnel enough money to the corporatist government to eliminate the communist unamerican cancerous hippy competition, perhaps by invalidating the GPL or carefully crafted patent laws?
this is truly exciting. if it didn't directly threaten our computing freedom it might even be fun to watch.
basically like a symlink on linux?
Gimme a break. Who needs security from offline attacks more than security from online ones?
no no no, you've got it all wrong. by off-line attack they mean "installing linux".